Should U.S. Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren be investigated for possibly practicing law without a license?

I heard about the poll in an email just after 1:30 p.m. today. I did not publicize the poll because while online polls are not scientific, I also didn’t want someone to say that the results were skewed by me publicizing the poll.

But, I figured that if the poll was getting attention, it would be interesting to see what it showed prior to the storm. So I took an image of the results as of 1:37 p.m., and the vote was 3-1 in favor of an investigation:

I checked back in and there was no sudden surge. The “Yes” vote climbed steadily throughout the afternoon, while the “No” vote didn’t move much.

This signals to me that while a little publicity probably helped the “Yes” vote, few people were coming to Warren’s defense. Here are the results as of 7:05 p.m.:

Before we execute the prisoner, and in the interest of fairness and thoroughness before taking irreversible action, do you suppose there is any possibility whatsoever that Warren meant she was descended from Jeep Cherokees?

Who needs a BBO investigation when “General Counsel” Michael Fredrickson has already come up with the conclusion. Lizzy Warren’s in the clear. He’ll probably conclude that she doesn’t need to pony up any back dues either; he might figure out a way that the BBO owes Warren money.

All these connected Democrats are going to find a way to say that Warren has fully complied with all laws. This stinks. And they believe, they really believe, that they have integrity and that the public should give them trust.

I hope you’re wrong, but in any case, why not go Alinsky on her by holding her to her own rules? She’s a big proponent of union rules and all sorts of regulations. She also wants to make sure the rich didn’t get that way by not following the rules. Well, was she following the rules when she got rich? Or was she charging $675/hour for work she couldn’t legally do? And from a university office? And from how clients, total? And for how much money? Let’s get it all on the table, Professor Warren. You are asking the voters of Massachusetts to trust you as their representative in Washington, so prove that you are trustworthy.

I want to see this advocate for regulation squirm as she comes up with complex excuses for not following the sort of regulation she always wants more of. The fact that she hasn’t really answered these charges indicates to me that she can’t, or at least can’t do so easily. Die-hard Democrats might vote for a weasel, but many independents will not.

Bingo!!! Getting yourself to and through law school, let alone Harvard is extremely difficult. Don’t tell me that Warren’s shenanigans don’t reflect poorly on the profession and HLS as well. Keep it up, Professor.

Don’t tell me that Warren’s shenanigans don’t reflect poorly on the profession and HLS as well.

9thDistrict: Having grown up in Cambridge as a Harvard faculty member’s child, I can tell you for sure that “you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy” as reside in that community. If they think for a moment that she might besmirch the reputation of the University or the law school, she’ll be under the bus faster than Obama’s grandmother.

Also, has anyone else realized how much Warren is starting to seem like a female Ward Churchill? Left-wing academic firebrand games affirmative action by claiming Native American blood, publishes shoddy research which somehow gets a pass, dabbles in plagiarism (research and art in his case, recipes in hers), and seems to get paid and promoted beyond their worth… until widespread scrutiny causes it to all come crashing down.

In some ways she’s worse: the supposed champion of the 99% and mortgage abuse was happy to take money from Evil Corporations Screwing the Little Guy, and make some more on foreclosed houses. Ward Churchill was a fraud, but I’m not sure he was a hypocritical fraud.

Finally, I think Brown and his supporters should lay off the tomahawk chops and such. They’ve made their point, and it does seem racist to some. (I know it’s not, but it’s pointless to agree with the offended, or the pseudo-offended.) The Indian thing is just one part of a pattern of self-serving fakery. Go after her on her research, her law license, making money from the sort of thing she condemns, using her Harvard office for outside work. Ask her to reveal her tax returns and law client list. Generally I don’t like character attacks in politics, but sheesh, I don’t want an outright fraud in the Senate, no matter how they vote.

There is quite a lot of similarity indeed – I recall that Ward “Little Eichmanns” Churchill also plagiarized some artwork [I believe] from a professor in Quebec. Claiming fake ‘injun status and plagiarism appear to go hand-in-hand.

I agree entirely! Professor, if you have any law students who share your principles, might a couple of them be inclined to do some plagiarism research on Warren? If she ripped off recipes for “Pow Wow Chow,” she might have ripped off others’ academic work as well. I saw an article today about a popular professor at Amherst accused of years of plagiarism who recently resigned in disgrace. Her students could not believe it – until they ran sentences from her writings through Google and other plagiarism detecting software.

Professsor: Is the MLW poll open to anyone or just MA lawyers? Not having any legal standing plus I do not like to be dishonorable, I did not take the poll. However, I would certainly vote Yes. My deepest respect to you for exposing this fraud of a person.

Henry Hawkins: might “Granny FireStoned” impart the same image with a couple of added twists? I still like Fauxahontas as the best descriptor of Warren.

I posted this at Volokh, I’m surprised I haven’t seen the same point here:I can’t believe a law blog with this many Lawyers can be this sloppy. Focusing on whether she was practicing in Federal or State court is irrelevant. She was practicing law in Massachusetts whether she ever filed a single brief or represented a single client in court, and she was practicing law without a license there for years.

If someone is giving any sort of legal advice, other than teaching, for remuneration then they are practicing law, and need to either have a license to practice law in the state, or be under the direct supervision of somebody that does. It doesn’t hinge on whether they go to court or not, or which court they are appearing in front of.

Ask a barber in Boston if he can cut hair in Massachusetts without a license if he only has out of state customers. He’ll think you are nuts because its such a stupid question. He needs a Massachusetts license to cut hair in Massachusetts, not a New Jersey barber’s license or a Texas license. Although I am sure it would be ok if he has a wealthy client fly him into Boston from Texas or New Jersey to cut his hair occasionally. But if his barber shop is in Massachusetts then he needs a Massachusetts license. Anybody from Boston ever see an expired Texas Barber’s license posted on the wall in a Boston barbershop? No, I didn’t think so.

A barber or a hairdresser is expected to know that, but it’s too complicated for a Harvard law professor to figure out?

A commenter named “Dudu” on a thread about the Elizabeth Warren law license problem said yesterday, “I heard today From Howie Carr, He said the Herald is waiting for certain documents from The Bar Overseers, and they wont be able to get them before Tuesday.